[DS] Getting back to the game RE: Engineers

G'day guys,

Some more from Brian for a while (and sorry to Brian this didn't come
through sooner) I'm about to go overseas for work again.

And on a side note can anyone identify "the little fig between DF-S14
and DF-S-16 is?  I'd assume DF-S15, but there is no Df-S15 listed at
GZG.com". Unfortunately I've run out of time to dig for myself.

Thanks heaps

Beth

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brian's message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Ryan Gill wrote:

>For a grav ARV, i'd suggest that you have the following constraints.

*snip a bunch of pretty cool background flavor*

All cool stuff, but basically PSB/Flavor, no real effect on game
mechanics.

I'm goign to drop the recoverry issue, since recovery vehicles are
outside
the game for now.

>Capacity of 8 would represent a fairly big module, that means the
garage
>module (not the vehicle carrying it, just the module) would be as big
as a
>class 1 vehicle.  The problem is, that as John A points out, there are
>varying amounts of equipment fielded at different levels.  I'm trying
to
>come up with something that's fair without adding TOO much more to the
game.

How big of a class is a 20' container? Is that size 2?

I don't know.  Capacity is a pretty nebulous concept, isn't it?  It's
mostly
volume, but is affected my mass.

What it comes down to is, what's a fair amount of capacity to require in
order for a repair vehicle to be able to make field repairs throughout
one
game?

>>True, but in game terms, unless you want to add rules that tie the
amount of
>>excavation work a vehicle can do in a turn to the size of its
equipment,
>>it's easier to just come up with one standard-capacity package for
>>excavation.
>
>Depends.

Upon what?

>A Blade is easy to tack on. The Abrams
>can carry a blade no problem. ITs the bigger
>stuff that costs more space. Screw auger,
>backhoe, front end loader, etc.

And those are the ones that are necessary to create all the emplacements
for
an entire unit.

>>>SEE trucks and the like with backhoes are
>>>pretty small.
>>
>>A backhoe is still larger than an autocannon, right?	A turreted RFAC
2 is
>
>Depends. There are little tiny jobbies on little
>1 men vehicles. The US Army fields a Short Wheel
>Base Unimog with a Front loader and rear mounted
>backhoe that can self deploy at higher speeds
>(than a tractor) and handle most basic jobs.
>Easily a class 2 truck with cargo space to spare.

And again, how much work could such a configuration do within the course
of
one game term?	Sure, there are varying sizes of enginnering equipment,
that
can do varying amounts of work in a given time, but that's a bit too
fine-grained for DS.

>>capacity 6.  Even allowing that a backhoe arm & bucket IS smaller than
the
>>next weapon up, that weapon's class 3, capacity 9.  Unless you
consoder a
>>backhoe to be a fixed weapon, in which case I could see it being 4-5
>>capacity.  But that still leaves out a dozer blade, etc.
>
>It can be fixed or turreted. I still think this
>is too complex. Whats wrong with an AEV that has
>an AEV package on it that takes 80% capacity. It
>can dig a position per turn for it's size. Size 4
>AEV can dig 4 class 4 tank scrape per turn or 8
>class 2 scrapes in a turn.

So now I have to calculate 80% of the vehicle, apply that capacity to
the
vehicle, then remember that it can create 4 scrapes for vehicles of the
same
class?	What about cross-class?  How many class 2 scrapes can a class 4
vehicle dig in a turn?	How many class 5 can a class 1 vehicle?  What
about
infantry cover?  In the end, isn't is simpler to say "Engineering
excavation
gear takes up x amount of capacity, and a vehicle with said gear can
prepare
Y emplacements of any class (including for infantry elements) per game
turn"?

>A Blade allows a fixed size scrape and only does
>have the work. But also allows proofing of
>minefields and clearing surface obstacles.

Ugh.  I still think that's getting too complicated.  And the obstacles
--
what about reinforced obstacles, not piddly earthen berms?  Should a
blade
clear those?   What about pop-up mines?  Will they still jump when
disrupted
by the blade, and will that pose a threat to the vehicle? Again,
separate
the excavation, mine clearing, and demolition functions, but standardize
each.

>>Actually, I would too.  Based on the rules, it seems that DFFG's make
>>perfect Demo Guns within the DS 2 framework.	But the rules say that
an
>>engineering element that spends its combat action adjacet to a target
can
>>demolish it -- the rules don't distinguish between an engineering
vehicle
>>and foot engineers.  That seemed odd.
>
>Not really. Demo guns are really short ranged
>(Really effin short) and have a bloody huge HE
>explosion that's not so good for armor. I'd just
>make it part of the "blow a building in 1 turn"
>kit.

Really sort range is still ranged, and that means "Farther than
ajacent."
In addition, ask Mr atkinson if a Demo gun could be used against
infantry.
So the rules do seem more geared towards replicating the effect of 
placed
demo charges as opposed to a gun.  And in game terms, for clearing
buildings
and obstacles, given the rules, I'd rather have a DFFG than an
engineering
package.

>>The problem is, that as the rules stand, I can deck that vehicle out
with
>>all the weapons and systems of a regular MBT of the same class, then
make it
>>capable of all the functions of an ARV AND an AEV, just by paying the
>>points -- the engineering stuff takes up no capacity.  Doesn't that
strike
>>you as cheesy?
>
>Don't. Its cheesy. Don't.

I KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!  THAT'S MY POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!	The
problem
is, if you don't assign a specific capacity to the equipment, you'll run
into trouble with two types of players:

1.  Cheeseheads who will do just what I warned of above.
2.  Honest players who don't want to engage in such Stiltonesque
practices,
but can't agree on the degree by which such a package will reduce the
capacity of the vehicle.

In the end, it just seems a lot simpler to assign a specific capacity to
the
different functions?

>Look at modern examples
>and how far they have or have not come with
>technology.

OK

>The Brits (basically the fore fathers
>of the Armored Engineer Vehicle) still have a
>basic set of classes:
>
>ARV Tank chassis without turret and kit for
>recovering a given class of vehicle.  Able to
>recover classes of vehicles smaller than itself.
>Usually has an MG or two for defense. Can seat a
>handy number of crew above a normal MBT in a big
>roomy compartment that usually has the winch
>built into it for protection and servicing.

So if you assume 4 capacity for the crews being rescued (that's equal to
an
infantry element) and one extra APSW, that's a heck of a lot of capacity
being taken up by the recovery & towing gear, especially if you allow it
to
only tow smaller vehicles.  That's 5 capacity to tow a class 1, 10 to
tow a
class 2 or smaller, 15 for a class 3 or smaller, etc.... in essence,
(Class
towed x 5).  That's what I proposed, IIRC.

>AEV: A tank w/ a turreted demolition gun and
>attachments for mission specific bits. Be they a
>fascine, dozer blade, Mine Clearing Line Charges,
>Carrot, and a number of other things.

I'll get to this below.

>AVLB: a tank chassis with turret removed and
>perhaps an MG with the ability to launch and
>recover a bridge of the same class as itself.
>
>Now a class 2 AVLB is able to launch a class 2
>Bridge. A Class 4 AVLB is able to launch a class
>4 bridge. The bridge is able to support what size
>it is or smaller.

IOW, The bridge takes up capacity equal to the max class of vehicle it
can
support x 5.  Again, wasn't that what I proposed earlier?

>> I'm not so concerned with the exact
>> physical details of the system as with its game effects.

This ties in with your comments about an AEV above:

>Same class or smaller. Standard packages cost
>80-100% of size of vehicle with wiggle room for
>extra bits like stowage of a power pack or spaces
>for the tank crew to ride. Think sliding scale vs
>fixed cost.

Again, the problem with a sliding scale of capacity means a sliding
scale of
capability.  I'd prefer a fixed capacity, and a fixed capability.   By
giving separate capacities for excavation, demolition, recovery, and
mine
clearing, you can equip a vehicle with all or some of those cpabilities
as
the player sees fit.